BYU To Award Dick Cheney An Honorary Degree

Both the Salt Lake Tribune (also now here) and the Deseret News (also here) report the unthinkable: BYU is going to award Dick Cheney an Honorary Doctorate of Public Service. I had resigned myself to the fact that my alma mater had acquiesced to Dick Cheney’s self invitation to speak at its commencement; however, I cannot begin to fathom the thinking that went into the decision to award Dick Cheney an honorary degree of anything.

Not only is he undeserving of this honor, it cheapens the commencement service, and all others who are receiving actual degrees or other honorary degrees.

From the Deseret News:

PROVO — Brigham Young University will bestow on Vice President Dick Cheney an honorary degree Thursday when he speaks at the university’s commencement exercises, a decision that further frustrated Cheney’s opponents on campus.

BYU and its board of trustees will give Cheney an Honorary Doctorate of Public Service and award honorary doctorates to four long-time university supporters.

There are many who are unhappy with this decision. Such an action implies tacit endorsement by BYU, and by extension the Church of Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration’s abhorrent political excesses and policies:

A number of professors and students who either opposed Cheney’s visit or welcomed the visit while criticizing the vice president’s policies had said that if BYU chose to bestow an honorary degree on Cheney, it would feel to them like an endorsement of Cheney’s policies by the university and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which owns the school.

“There are a number of faculty and students who are shocked and surprised and dismayed that Mr. Cheney will not only be honored as a commencement speaker but also receive an honorary degree from BYU,” business professor Warner Woodworth said. “I believe this is the first time in BYU history the school has so honored a commencement speaker who is in the process of being impeached by Congress.”

Cheney will arrive in Utah Thursday at 1:55 p.m. and meet with the First Presidency of the church at 2:30. Commencement begins at 4 p.m.

Professor Woodworth’s observation is well taken. Awarding such a degree to Dick Cheney at BYU, “makes reason stare.” More from the Deseret News:

The announcement that BYU would award Cheney an honorary doctorate caused an additional stir on Wednesday, with some faculty and students who oppose the vice president’s politics and policies. Some said the degree adds a measure of endorsement for Cheney that made them uncomfortable and that BYU was wise not to announce the degree until late Tuesday.

“One does wonder what message BYU intends to send with this,” political science professor Darren Hawkins said. “Honorary degrees are sometimes conferred by universities to proclaim their approval of the honoree’s character and qualities, and if that’s what BYU intends to do, I disagree wholeheartedly with the award of an honorary degree. I don’t think BYU should be commending Vice President Cheney’s character or actions to anyone.

“If they intend to acknowledge his long public service, then I have less of a problem with it because it is certainly true he has risen to a high office and has a long career of public service.”

I wish those who are protesting Dick Cheney’s appearance this week at the Lord’s University well. I hope they turn out in force. I will even go so far as to advocate some type of protest inside the Marriot Center when Cheney’s degree is bestowed.

This is a sad and dark day in BYU history. Shame on this decision to link BYU and the Church to an individual of such questionable moral character and repute. As Hugh Nibley once observed this of all commencements will commemorate the gathering of those in clothed in the black robes of a false priesthood.

A routine meeting with the First Presidency is not at all the same as honoring Dick Cheney the way BYU is doing by allowing him to speak at commencement and then award him an honorary degree. I would prefer the First Presidency not meet with him; however, when national leaders visit Salt Lake City, they routinely make a photo op visit with the FP. I accept that fact, and its even one I can live with. Not so the commencment address and now an honorary degree. Dick Cheney is not an honorable man.

This just adds insult to injury. Did they decide they wanted to dig the hole even deeper? How far behind the times does one have to be not to realize that Cheney has not a shred of credibility left on any issue?

The good news is that the Ph.D. is for his contributions to Gadiantonism by his repeated demonstrations on the necessity of obtaining the sole management of the government, with a minor in Giddianhi-ism for his boldness in standing up to those who favor a return to the good old days when the Constitution actually stood for something.

Well, looking at the bright side, the church is for sinners…Jesus didn’t come to heal the healthy, but the sick.

That said, I really wonder about this relationship between church leaders and Cheney. I will certainly have questions for them in the afterlife. There’s no point in questioning them now. Our church leaders are highly conservative politically (with few exceptions). President Hinckley himself stated in his “War and Peace” talk of April 2003 that he trusted the Bush administration to have access to more intelligence and astoundingly to use it properly. President Hinckley is going to have to account for that mistake at some point.

Dan: Yes, but the Church only helps those sinners who recognize themselves as such. Something tells me Dick Cheney doesn’t exactly fit into that category.

It’s not really a surprise that Church leaders have strong political beliefs they always have. I think that point is very well made in the Prince and Wright book on David O. McKay. Anyway, I’m pleased to see all the success of the BYU protests and their alternative commencement.

Guy, I’m really entertained by most of the press coverage and attention-getting theatrics of this issue. It’s way better than any talk show. Even better than the last BYU protest I was involved in.

I was especially amused to note that the “alternative” ceremonies are all timed to take place _after_ the real commencement ritual. Even BYU political protesters don’t want to miss out on their own graduation.

I personally don’t see the point. I did not attend my own graduation ceremony at University of California. They sent my diploma in the mail. At that point in time, I had everything I ever wanted of beneficent gifts bestowed by my Alma Mater. I just wanted to get away from there.

Today I’m much more interested to have a chance to hear Cheney speak, in person. Looks like I’ll have a front-row seat in the Marriot Center. I will post a report later.

I’ve not backed Bush in a long time and I’ve never agreed with this war. However, I find Dan’s speculation that the propjhet will be held accountable for having political views that are not his own is completely inappropriate. Do you have evidence that President Hinckley turned his back on something that was revealed to him? I respect you and generally enjoy this site. So rather than stay around and argue, I’ll bow out of this one. consider me a human pinata. 🙂

Jim: It is somewhat entertaining; but, it is also a bit frustrating to have the Church and BYU tied to any acceptance of Dick Cheney, the Bush Administration and their reprehensible policies.

Like you I did not attend my graduation (from BYU) as my law school classes started before graduation (August graduation). But, for some, it is a big deal. And for those, I think a more appropriate commencement speaker would have been better.

I look forward to your report. Since you will be on the front row, I assume that when those clothed in the black robes of the false priesthood arise to bestow the acolades of this world on Dick Cheney that you personally will rise and lead a silent protest of those in the building by turning your backs to the podium.

John: Sorry, I didn’t mean anything personal. Notwithstanding Dan’s rhetoric, I don’t really believe anyone commenting is seriously suggesting that the prophet will be held accountable or that anyone is calling him to repentance. Perhaps your comment was meant more tongue in cheek than I read it. President Hinckley like all prophets are human and they have and are entitled to their own opinions–even political ones.

Incidentally, the last BYU protest I was personally involved in was the occasion of the departure from the BYU faculty of a certain Assistant Professor, by the name of Cecilia. Those of you with good memories will know of whom I speak.

Wait a sec, President Hinckley clearly was wrong in his assessment of the war (as was the Congress and millions of people who originally backed the war). There’s nothing wrong with admitting that the prophet was wrong in his assessment. I don’t think Dan was calling the prophet to repenance, he was just saying that the prophet has responsibility over his stewardship and failed in his analysis over a certain aspect of that responsibility and will be held accountable, exactly in the same way that when I fail in analysis over a certain aspect of my stewardship I will be held accountable. It’s an observation, not a call to repentance.

There can be any number of reasons why the FP is meeting with Cheney and permitting his self-invitation to speak out our commencement. We don’t have all the facts, we don’t know what went into such decisions, and so we see through a glass darkly in this situation as we observe from a distance the decisions being made.

That being said, I am astounded at the decision to award the honorary degree. Unless the degree is in Gadiantonism as Mark N. (#6) says, or in anti-Constitutionalism, I can’t see why the decision was made to confer the document. Ugh.

Isn’t awarding an honorary degree pretty much standard protocol for graduation speakers? I have never been to a college graduation ceremony where the invited speaker was not awarded an honorary degree.

the awarding of honorary degrees at BYU has been more or less rare over the years. Every school has its own little traditions. At Columbia, for example, they give out four or five honorary degrees every year, but only the university president gives the commencement address. The fact the BYU has often not granted honorary degrees would seem to have given them an easy way out if they wanted it. Obviously some benighted souls really believe that Cheney deserves one.

But as citizens we are all under the direction of our respective national leaders. They have access to greater political and military intelligence than do the people generally.

This is his basis for trusting Bush and Cheney in regards to Iraq. Unfortunately for President Hinckley, his assessment, while true, was not whole. He did not add “and I trust they use it properly.” He implies that in his talk, however. But as we know (and as some of us knew back then) Bush and Cheney were not using their access to greater intelligence properly, but were politicizing it to sell a war that clearly did not need to be fought.

Clearly President Hinckley made a mistake politically, in trusting governmental leaders. And he will have to account for that. I understand his reasoning in staying silent about this mistake, and I’m not really bothered that he is not speaking out against the administration, but I really do wonder what he is doing cuddling so closely with this administration when they have been clearly un-Constitutional.

“Clearly President Hinckley made a mistake politically, in trusting governmental leaders. And he will have to account for that.”

You’re treading on dangerous ground Daniel. To be quite frank none of us have the whole picture when it comes to Iraq and it’s overall effect on God’s plan. President Hinckley’s mission is not a political one, it is to accomplish the three fold mission of the church, and it is inappropriate in my opinion to suggest that any of us mortals can truly judge whether that mission has been helped or hindered on an eternal scale by the War in Iraq. Keep in mind that God works in mysterious ways, even something that might seem foolish according to the wisdom of men might be playing directly into divine plan.

By all means do your best to understand everything according to the limits of your capacity, but don’t be so full of hubris as to presume that your political views will be the standard that will be imposed against others on judgement day.

To a believing Latter-day Saint, President Hinckley is the one that holds the keys that give him the right to revelation regarding the overall missions of the church. That is his responsibility and what he will be called to account for, not the day to day politics of this nation or any other. Sure, form your own opinion about what effects certain events might have, but be humble enough to realize that when it comes to the scale that God is concerned with you are only seeing a very small part of the picture.

The truth we learn from our religion should form the foundation upon which we build our political beliefs. Not the other way around. The minute you find yourself judging your fellow Saints through the eyes of your politics is the minute you need to take a step back and reevaluate your priorities.

Are you saying that not one of the thousands of American soldiers, many of which are faithful Latter Day Saints, are showing examples of Christian compassion towards their fellow soldiers or Iraqis? That my friend is the work of the Lord. Don’t underestimate God’s ability to make good things happen even in the middle of the most horrible circumstances.

And that is just speaking on a small scale. On a large scale not one of us really knows what the overall effect of this war will be. Your opinion obviously is that it will have a negative effect, my opinion is that it will have a positive one if we stick with it. But both of us are only relying on our own wisdom in coming to this decision so we should stick within the bounds that that sets.

Anyway, you’ve already granted that “President Hinckley’s mission is not a political one …” So, in this case, I would assume that his followers are free to take up divergent political views without “treading on dangerous ground”.

We all have to account for the positions we take. The question becomes who must we account to, with multiple answers depending on whatever it is we’re talking about. As far as politics are concerned, I think that you are treading on dangerous ground to suggest that Hinckley’s followers must also look to him for their political cues.

If you’ve not read the LDS church’s position on this, it is available on their website. As far as I can tell, you appear to be offering a line of reasoning that runs counter to the guidance coming from your own church leadership.

the awarding of honorary degrees at BYU has been more or less rare over the years.

Thanks, this is better information than I had. For the record, BYU awarded five honorary degrees today, just to put this in perspective.

The fact the BYU has often not granted honorary degrees would seem to have given them an easy way out if they wanted it. Obviously some benighted souls really believe that Cheney deserves one.

Okay, I’ll take your word for it.

BYU President Samuelson announced the awarding of honorary degrees and read the curriculum vitae for each of the recipients. President Hinckley sat just behind the speakers podium, and applauded each of the awards. Elders David Bednar and Richard G. Scott sat between vice president Cheney and President Hinckley.

Clearly President Hinckley made a mistake politically, in trusting governmental leaders. And he will have to account for that. I understand his reasoning in staying silent about this mistake, and I’m not really bothered that he is not speaking out against the administration, but I really do wonder what he is doing cuddling so closely with this administration when they have been clearly un-Constitutional.

President Hinckley and Vice President Cheney walked into the Marriot Center today together, both waving at an obviously friendly and enthusiastic crowd.

I personally will interpret President Hinckley’s leadership at this meeting as reaffirmation from church leaders that they continue to support our US government leaders.

The commencement ceremonies were totally unremarkable in every respect. The speakers addressed issues relating to BYU, graduation, and the challenges of life. Cheney’s address itself was brief and entertaining. My impression, as on previous occasions, is that he is an accomplished public speaker.

I see no indication that church leaders or BYU administrators were attempting to be “silent” about their continuing patriotic support and loyalty. They are not “speaking out against the administration” of Bush and company because they have no substantive criticism. I cannot understand why anyone would reasonably imagine otherwise.

The strongest impression I had at the commencement ceremony today was that this occasion is _not_ a political statement. Nobody is announcing official church sanction of wars or government officials. I am certain that Cheney did not obtain absolution for his sins from the church leaders.

Rather than hearing political themes, what I saw and heard today was a unanimous expression of approval for the intergenerational process at BYU that produces college-educated people. BYU perpetuates family traditions in higher education. The most important people in attendance today — families. Graduates and their spouses and children. Mothers and fathers, grandparents, aunts and uncles, siblings.

It was not an occasion to make critical remarks about political issues. It was a family celebration.

I can see that most of those making comments here just don’t get this, and don’t really care to hear it. So I’ll just leave it at that.

I guess you wouldn’t have any idea that plenty of other schools also celebrate “the intergenerational process” at their commencements.

That’s OK, I understand you’d probably have to first attend one in order to realize how the perpetuation of “family traditions in higher education” kinda gets celebrated all the time all over the place, even outside Utah County, and especially on campuses around commencement time.

But, as you wrote above,

I personally don’t see the point. I did not attend my own graduation ceremony at University of California. They sent my diploma in the mail. At that point in time, I had everything I ever wanted of beneficent gifts bestowed by my Alma Mater. I just wanted to get away from there.

So, let me get this straight: you bailed on your own commencement, but now you’re railing against some graduating students who decided to form an opinion about theirs and actually went out and did something constructive to make it what they wanted.

Seems like maybe you could’ve just gone to see your hero speak and left it at that.

“As far as politics are concerned, I think that you are treading on dangerous ground to suggest that Hinckley’s followers must also look to him for their political cues”

I think you’re reacting to what you think I’m saying rather than what I tried to convey. Perhaps it’s my fault for not being clear enough. My posts were not intended to be Republican vs Democrat, they were intended to be Religion vs Politics.

In particular, it’s inappropriate to have your political views trump your religious ones. The baseline of truth upon which your logic rests should be the Gospel, not the talking points of your chosen political party.

As a concrete example, were the church to come out and officially declare that the Iraq War was immoral and state the reason for such then I would expect all supporters of the War to begin to factor that newly taught truth into how they consider the politics and to reshape their views around it. If the statement went the other way then I would expect the opponents of the War to do likewise. Given that the church is not taking an official position on the War I believe it indicates that a faithful member can hold either view as long as the motivation behind their view is founded upon gospel truths. Now both sides can consider the other to be wrong on a political scale of course but to translate that into religious censure is inappropriate.

Perhaps it bothers you that I give such deference to the church when it comes to the truth of what is God’s will, but I believe in modern day revelation and the authority of Church leaders to teach us correct principles and then allow us to make our choices relying upon those principles. I’m not going to apologize for that belief.

Hey everyone, for the most part, I think these comments and the discussion are great. But PLEASE refrain from suggesting that someone is not fully living the Gospel of Christ, whether you support Cheney and Iraq or you oppose Cheney and Iraq. One can be a follower of Christ and have differing political opinions on this and other issues.

I would feel badly if anyone felt I was asking them to apologize for their beliefs, and please call me on it if you ever feel that I’m suggesting you do so.

Sorry, but I put politics in one box and religion in another and maybe fail to grasp why politically active Mormon students should be made to feel they owe anything other than political explanations for their political actions. As far as I can tell, the kids themselves weren’t throwing religion into the mix, and I applaud them for taking what looks to me to be a principled stand based on their political beliefs. From what I’ve picked up from the protest coverage, they’ve extended the proper consideration to their religious leaders, and not allowed any apparent divergenence in political views to diminish their respect and deference to their leadership in religious matters.

Given that the church is not taking an official position on the War I believe it indicates that a faithful member can hold either view as long as the motivation behind their view is founded upon gospel truths

President Hinckley stated clearly in his “war and peace” talk that his views on Iraq are his own. As such, I question them. I think he should have stayed silent, personally, if the official position of the church is to have no position. But he stated that he implicitly trusted his political leaders to use their greater access to intelligence for wise purposes. That turned out to be a bad assumption for President Hinckley. Now perhaps he has a close relationship with Cheney and Bush because of both of them being quite conservative in their political views, and that Cheney and Bush are rewarding the state of Utah, and more particularly the Provo area (where they probably got 90% of the vote in the 2004 election, for their allegiance. Perhaps President Hinckley sees in both Bush and Cheney better morals than in Clinton et al. I really don’t care about how close a prophet is to a political leader. Elder Neal A. Maxwell had a really close relationship to the idiot Hugh Hewitt. That’s his prerogative. But if President Hinckley is going to talk in General Conference about his personal views about a divisive conflict, he had better well be accurate. If not, then he must account for his mistake.

But as citizens we are all under the direction of our respective national leaders. They have access to greater political and military intelligence than do the people generally.

and

In a democracy we can renounce war and proclaim peace. There is opportunity for dissent. Many have been speaking out and doing so emphatically. That is their privilege. That is their right, so long as they do so legally. However, we all must also be mindful of another overriding responsibility, which I may add, governs my personal feelings and dictates my personal loyalties in the present situation.

On a related note, did you see Lt. Col. Paul Yingling’s article in the Armed Forces Journal? I wrote about it and quoted extensively. Take a look. An active mid-level army leader excoriates his bosses on how they handled Iraq.

Well, it’s good to see that Vietnam War-Era mentality is back in fashion. How many of us think that not attempting to stop terrorist attacks would have saved any lives? How many of us don’t think life–any life–is precious. How many of us trust God to work things out in the end? Just what I thought.

Life’s not fair, and men make mistakes–even important men. I personally don’t believe that President Hinckley will have anything to “account for” about his personal political beliefs as long as they don’t contradict gospel principles. (I don’t think any of us will, either.)

On a side note, couldn’t President Hinckley’s trust in his political leaders be taken as a show of confidence and inspiration to the government? If Family Home Evening isn’t going well, do you want your kids to say, “Dad, you suck,” or “Dad, we trust that you can make it work”? Even if we don’t “trust” or “approve” of the way the Bush Administration is handling things, they deserve our support because, ahem, WE ELECTED THEM!

Dad presiding over FHE is not even close to the same planet let alone same ballpark as the president of a country leading a country to war. The problem is that the evidence was there before the war that the intelligence was being manipulated. Trouble is too few bothered to listen. Too many had their blood boiling for vengeance for 9/11. So sad.

[…] subsequent support for the Bush Administration (in 2005, Dick Cheney was awarded an honorary doctorate and invited as the commencement speaker at BYU, the Church’s flagship institution), raise important […]

Messengers of HOPE
Passionate about establishing Peace and love in IRAQ

To my dear messengers of HOPE, to all of you who are passionate about establishing love and peace in Iraq, I hope you receive this news in your best health.

We would like to thank you every one of you for your profound support in launching the “Messengers of Hope”.

Our main goal in forming “Messengers of Hope” is to help the 2.3 million Iraqi people displaced from their homes; 65% are Children.

They are still living inside Iraq, in the Sahara, outside cities and near the borders of Kuwait, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria.

Some of them do not have a tent or any shelter; they are suffering and are in desperate need of medicine, food, water and heating. The children in these areas also have neither care nor education.

All are the victims of war in Iraq. Our aim is to help them recuperate, adjust to their refuge and ultimately stop the violence and hostility in their home land, so they can return to their homes safely.

The destruction and bombings have not just killed the innocent but also killed the hope of the people who have to live through the daily ordeal; with uncertainty of the future concerning safety and security.
Even the environment and the habitat have been contaminated because of the radiation resulting from depleted uranium and the ensuing diseases.
It is vital to consider the cleaning and protection of the environment in Iraq in order to stop the contamination of the environment spreading throughout the whole region (Middle East).

All this certainly does not sustain a respectable human life.

“Messengers of HOPE” seeks to both provide humanitarian relief and raising awareness of the issue by making a documentary of their plight.
“Messengers of HOPE” are currently working on this project and raising funds to be able to buy:
1. Dried food and clean water.
2. Clothing and blankets.
3. Education materials including stationery items and books.
4. Medicine.
5. Twenty large trailers to provide mobile medical, mobile education centres and mobile power supplies.

With these raised funds we will also produce documentaries to raise awareness on the situation.

If you would like to help with the documentary or have something to donate please contact Aziz Al-Naib, aziz_alnaib@hotmail.com

We urge you to engage in talks or dialogue, to attend our meetings and be involved in helping, so that together we can reach the best solutions for these problems. Let’s put an end to the crisis and suffering of these people and achieve the ultimate goal for all Iraqis: LOVE and PEACE.

We welcome any suggestions you can give us as to ways and means of raising funds to achieve our goal.

Please spread the message and share this e-mail with anyone you know, be it Leaders, individuals or organisations.

My best regards, God bless you all and may The Mighty bless and save Iraq.

Aziz Al Naib
Artist and Ambassador for Peace, UPF

¨ Founder of “Messengers of HOPE”, Passionate about establishing Peace and love in IRAQ
¨ Arabian Cultural Club, Promoting multi-cultural understanding
¨ Iraqi/British multi media consultant, writer and Journalist.
¨ Founder and Chair of Arabian Cultural Club U.K.
¨ One of the founders of Aljamaheer press and publishing house in Iraq.
¨ One of the publishers and designer of Al-Yaum Newsletter in the U.K
¨ Member of the Iraqi Journalist Union, the Iraqi Arts Society, the Iraqi Calligraphy Union, the Iraqi Artist Union, and one of the founders of the Gallery 4 in Baghdad and London U.K.
¨ One of the founders of Iraqi Arts Society in the UK.

”Messengers of HOPE” are working together with UPF to support United Nations initiatives to fulfill the Millennium Development projects.
We are looking for the support of: the Arab, Muslim and International Leaders, The UN Refugee Agency, The Friends of the UN, The Arab League, The Arab and Muslim Red Crescent, The Red Cross, The Refugee Council, Amnesty International, The Human Rights Watch, The Iraqi Parliament, all Arabs, Muslims and all other Nations, Arabian Cultural Club and the Activists, NGO’s and other organizations who share the same vision; working towards helping the displaced and caring for the environment, safety, security and the future of the whole region.

Many thanks for supporting “Messengers of HOPE”.
I am grateful to you and hope we can get advice from you.
Or please send it to the right people with many thanks.
Eid Mubarak, Merry Christmas and have a wonderful New Year.
Sincere Regards,
Aziz Al-Naibaziz_alnaib@hotmail.com

[…] of Humanities Degree, to Glenn Beck? Really? Oh, the Humanities! Though, I can’t say the Mormons have done much better in some of their prior selections of commencement speakers and honorary degrees . . . […]